The present invention relates to pneumatically powered inline tools, especially hand-held screwdrivers, nutrunners, impact wrenches and drills. These tools generate start-up and reactive torque forces, which can be injurious to the human anatomy. A device, which could safely distribute the forces created by inline power tools, is clearly indicated and necessary to the welfare of the human operator. Present methods employed to protect operators from these forces include “torque arm tool supports”. These devices consist of an arm, which either clamps to the tools, or attaches to the tools utilizing the air inlet pipe thread that is common to such tools. The opposing end of the arm is attached to a structure, such as a workbench frame. The torque arm tool supports do an effective job of absorbing torque, but at the cost of tool mobility and perceived usability by the operator, since the tool is rigidly connected to a semi-stationary structure. This arrangement decreases the freedom of movement that an operator desires in order to correctly position the tool for work. Another type of attachment, which is well represented in prior art, is a brace which attaches to the power tool and provides a lever to reduce and refer torque forces away from the vulnerable wrist joint of the operator. These braces have a disadvantage in that they clamp to the body of the tool. This attachment means necessitates an accurately sized and shaped clamping collar, specific to each tool. An example of this prior art design is the Bio-Brace (T.M.) device manufactured by DG Industries of Brea, Calif. Other devices, in an effort to provide more versatility, employ a vee-shaped jaw clamp attachment which is problematic, as it exerts uneven circumferential pressure on the sensitive housing of the tool, which can result in tool malfunction or premature failure and damage to the outside surface of the tool, so that if the brace were removed, the gripping area of the tool could be comprimised in surface quality enough to cause discomfort or injury to the operator. A jaw clamp type of attachment has also a disadvantage of unnecessary additional weight. An example of such a brace is disclosed in U.S. Pat. No. 6,324,728.